Thursday Morning Reading

Good morning, all. Just wanted to give you all the URL to
Boz's chat at 11 a.m. I know the subject of Manny Acta's future will come up -- possibly because some of you will BRING it up. Boz will also be on "Washington Post Live" tonight at 5 p.m. and I'll try something new -- I'll post a video clip so if you're working or commuting during that time you can see it. You can let me know how you like that.

And this just in: Chico will chat Monday at noon.

The forecast for tonight's game -- eh, not good. In fact, it looks like it could be a wet weekend at Nats Park. However, the forecast for that Tuesday day game? 80 degrees. Sweet!

Looking for something slightly positive? How about this ... in the last 10 games, the Nats are 4-6. There are 6 teams that have worse records (Baltimore, Tampa, Oakland, Florida, NY Mets and San Diego all went 3-7) and 4 teams with the same record (Kansas City, Cleveland, Cubs and Colorado). Take away the three heart-breaking losses (Monday in Philly, the 1-0 game against Atlanta and that Sunday game against the Marlins) and the Nats could have been 7-3 in the last 10.

I'm hoping that not having to play any NL East teams for the next 2 weeks will jump start this team into a nice, long winning streak. Hey, a guy can hope, right?

and now that I am at an actual computer and not on my cell phone, I can give a more in-depth opinion. Then you can understand exactly where I am coming from. I'm not just ranting when I say "Fire Manny".

I spent all of last season defending Manny. He had a cruddy team, and I realized that. All of the same excuses and rationales being made now, I made last year. I was full-on in the Manny bandwagon.

The Nats went out this offseason and improved in nearly every facet. I spent all offseason preaching this to the RickFelts and co. of this board. This team is far better in terms of flat-out talent than last year's team was. I said this before, and I still believe it. They aren't a playoff team, but they are a middle-of-the-pack team, as far as talent goes.

There is no reason this team should be the worst in baseball.

You folks believe that Manny still has the "crappy team" excuse to fall back on. I do not. He's got the talent around him to produce a competitive, 75-win, "middle-of-the-pack" team. Not a team that continually finds the most embarassing ways to lose, and is the joke of baseball.

It is his job to ensure that the players play to their capabilities, and they are playing far below that in every aspect except hitting. It is Manny's job to do things like have the team take an indepth fielding practice when they go to a new stadium that they've never seen before.

It's his job to pitch the guys out of the bullpen in the correct situations, rather than stubbornly sticking with his favorites in situations where they fail repeatedly and consistently, and assigning strict "roles" to certain pitchers that he never deviates from even if the situation warrants it.

You say "Milledge", I say Manny had little to do with that decision. I say that was done despite Manny, and if he had to decide, Milledge would still be the everyday CFer.

in 2007, Manny did a lot with a little. in 2008 he did nothing, with less than nothing. in 2009, Manny is doing less with much more than he had last year, or the year before. This year's team is the best team, talent-wise, that we've had since 2005. No excuses from my point of view. Now it is time to either move this team in the right direction, or get someone who will.

Each season Manny has been here, the team has gotten worse record-wise. Right now, I believe, this team has a worst record than last year's team had 20 games in, but I could be mistaken.

I think Manny would make a wonderful Minor League Manager, where player development trumps winning. He's got the temperament for player development in spades. But I do not believe he is the Manager that is going to take us to where we need to go.

If Manny changes somewhat, and gets this thing turned around, I'll happily back off my views. But I don't see any indication of that happening anytime soon.

The most frustrating part of this season is just as Manny's head is placed in the guillotine and Stan Kasten has his hand on the rope, the Nats perform as they were supposed to given the off season improvements. The Team - to its own disservice - keeps saving Acta's head by performing to the level where there isn't a chance for Acta's inability to manage the bullpen screws things up. too bad they didn't lose one or two more in a row in April. We'd have a competant Manager in the dugout.

Thing is, if this team were 10-10 we wouldn't be having this conversation, and if they had a real closer, they would be 10-10, at least. As Manny said, "It's not like we can call the bullpen and get Rollie Fingers in here."

People talk about a manager losing the team, but what if it's the team who's lost the manager? Working for/with Bowden has to take a chunk out of anybody's attitude, whether they admit it or not. At some point, his subconscious is going to be thinking "[Kip] these passive-aggressive clock-punching Aholes!" before he consciously realizes he's thinking it.

I could not have said it better myself Mr.Madison while i like Manny a lot he needs to be replaced, Stan likes Manny because Manny ain't gonna rock the boat and it seems there's a malaise with this team especially with management. I think the players want to win but they are handcuffed by some of Manny's moves during the course of a game,players respond to leadership and confidence and so far Manny has shown not one of those traits.

I'm not anti-Acta, I am anti-losing. Whenever I have a negative thought regarding Manny I feel like I should apologize to myself (how could you, Manny's such a good guy?). Manny has some definate strengths and his team has some definate weaknesses that have nothing to do with management, but this team does have some definate issues that are things that we expect managers to resolve.

When a player does not field well, you blame the player. When a team does not field well, you blame the manager.

When a player does not run the bases well, you blame the player, when a team does not run the bases well, you blame the manager.

When a team finishes with the worst record in baseball one year, you can blame the injurries, when a team follows that up with the worst record in baseball the following year, you hold the manager accountable.

This team has a definate lack of talent as compared to the leagues top teams. The Red Sox have Youkilis, Pedroia, Bay, Ortiz, Ellsbury, Drew, Beckett, Matsusaka, Lester, etc.... Only Zimmerman, Guzman, and Dunn crack their lineup. You can make similar comparisons to the Yankees, Mets, Rays, etc... except that maybe Zimmerman and Guzman don't crack those lineups.

But you can also compare the Nationals to the Pirates, Royals, Mariners, and Padres where the Nationals roster stacks up rather nicely. Yet the Nats results are much, much worse. Three years, three terrible starts.

When he was hired, Manny probably said he wanted to make sure his players were ready to play. I'll make sure we have a fundamentally sound team. I'll show patience, but get results. I believe in managing by the numbers because its been proven to me that you get the best results. If we have problems, I'll deal with them quietly and correct the problems.

But here we are 2.5 years later and the team is not performing. Are there valid explanations for why the results are bad? Yes. Is Manny responsible for the failings? Only partially. Is it time to make a change? I don't know. But, its time to get better results.

It would not be fair to blame Manny, but at this point, it would not be unfair to fire him either.

You know what - I was going to try and make a comment... but I give up.

Some people are in the "Fire Manny" camp and those folks will generally make a comment to support their position. Right or wrong - they (we) are at least trying to make a convincing argument.

From nunof and some of the others in the "Keep Manny" camp cannot post anything but snark. And it's not his fault...

Can the "Keep Manny" people at least try to help convince us "Fire Manny" people what we are not seeing - or should we just expect more snark like "Yeah, there's really no reason Ryan Zimmerman should have been handed a job this season. Much less that big contract." What does that even mean?

I'm surprised no one here has yet commented on Boz's chat tidbit that the Lerners are using their profits from the team to pay down the debt that they chose to take on in order to buy the franchise. Do people think this is consistent with Mark Lerner's vow that for the first decade any profits they realize would be put back into the team? I don't.

Jayson Stark's rumblings addresses attendance figures and other things. Personally, if he Royals are looking for a big bat and are willing to give up the top prospects, I hope Rizzo has been on the phone.

The highlights: Bowden went on the radio in LA and (i) jokingly compared the Nationals to the Washington Generals; (ii) said the decision to sign highly touted pitching prospect Stephen Strasburg already has been made; (iii) said that the Nats didn't sign their No. 1 pick, Aaron Crow, last year because "we weren't given the dollars to finish that," and (iv) said that the Nats offered free agent first baseman Mark Teixeira "more money and more years than anybody in baseball."

"Can the "Keep Manny" people at least try to help convince us "Fire Manny" people what we are not seeing"

I'm not really that interested in beating this topic to death any more, but the basic reason that I am against firing Manny is that, from my viewpoint, there is no reason do so.

I realize that many of you disagree with his laid-back demeanor, his bullpen use, his lineups, substitutions, etc, and that's fine. I simply don't agree with you. I don't want a lunatic manager a la Lou Pinella, and I don't think using one lousy reliever instead of another would have substantially changed the course of this season to date.

He's had, as I have mentioned before, multiple times, now approaching an eight of a season with a reasonably talented club -- and that's ignoring(!) the pitching. I'd like to give him a reasonable amount of time to get things going this season.

I understand, as a matter of practicality, that if that Nats keep going at .250 clip, that Manny's toast whether he deserves it or not (as Little Bill found out in Unforgiven, "fair's got nothin' to do with it").

Count me in as one of the "Don't Fire Manny"-istas. However, if he doesn end up getting fired, it would not surprise me. Sometimes ballclubs need to do something to shake things up if the team is playing below expectations. However, I feel that 20 games into 2009 is not enough time to make the determination that this team is underperforming.

2007 -- Manny's first year. Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, out there in the baseball world predicted that the Nats would have the worst record in the history of baseball. Nats end up 73-89 and in 4th place in the NL East. Manny gets some votes for Manager of the Year.

2008 -- Roster is comprised of has-beens and malcontents. Injuries ravaged the club. Nats end up 59-102.

To me, 2007 this team overachieved. 2008, they underachieved. So, 2009 should be the make-or-break season for the Nats. This year, some of the young prospects will be given a shot (Dukes, Martis, ZNN). Some wily veterans have been brought in (Dunn, Willingham, Tavarez, Beimel). Most agreed that the offense would be significantly better than the last 2 seasons. And most agreed that the starting pitching has the potential to be better than the past 2 seasons, but it also has a potential to be pretty bad. Finally, I think most agreed that the bullpen would be the weakest part of the team and that all of the pieces would have to align perfectly for the Nats to come anywhere close to competing.

Well, after 20 games the offense has been better. Except for the first starts for Lannan, Olsen and Martis (and for the as-advertised, less than stellar Cabrera starts), the SP has been pretty good. The bullpen has been the kink in this armor. Obviously none of the pieces have fit properly. At the start of the season, most of us were optimistic that Hanrahan could be the closer (sure, he'd blow a few, but who would have thought he'd blow all of his chances right away?) and that having three lefties in the bullpen would be a huge asset.

Well, Ledezma's gone. So is Shell. And Rivera decided to go all Levale Speigner on us. So up comes Mock, Bergmann and Wells. Down goes Bergmann (again) and in comes Kensing. Maybe these pieces will fit now. Maybe they won't. But I will tell you this much ... This team has been in almost every game so far this season (yes, I am discounting the first 2 games against the Marlins). I can make an argument as to how Manny has put this team in position to win most of these games. Take away a bloop hit here, a 4-pitch walk there, a wild-pitch here (all from the bullpen) and the Nats are 10-10.

So for me, this is the season to judge Manny on. And I believe he deserves more than 20 games before anyone should throw him under a bus. I see May 31 as the date to decide his fate. The season will be almost 1/3 of the way through by then. If the team is playing under par, then maybe it is time to cut Manny. But I think he deserves more than 20 games.

Manny has a real feel for his players and the game. That's why he went against all common sense and logic and started Austin Kearns in favor of Elijah Dukes on opening game. That turned out to be a brilliant decision didn't it. Gimmie a break.

let me ask a question. why is any manager that is not like manny automatically a "lunatic"? is it really so bad to simply want a manager who SEEMS to actually care? why does it have to be one extreme or the other?

To add to joebleux's comments, everyone seems to jump to the conclusion that this team is somehow more talented than last year's, but I have yet to see any evidence of that except in the offense. I grant that the offense is comparable to a "middle-of-the-road" team (a leadoff hitter would be nice), but the pitching is just not there. The team chose to come into the season with a bunch of youngsters and the Daniel Cabrera project in the rotatation, and completely ignored the bullpen until March (conveniently when Rizzo took over), and even then only signed Beimel, Wells, and Tavarez. People keep saying Acta's bullpen management is poor, but I just don't see how one can make that claim when there's no talent to manage. Furthermore, lots of folks bash Acta for pulling starters early (like when he pulled Zimmermann with 83 pitches), but this is the National League, people. The manager has more to consider than just pitch counts, like, say, whether the pitcher is coming up to bat in that inning (which has been the reason for many of the incidents in question) and who from the opposing team the pitcher will be facing. Others who argue for more base stealing and "small ball" are just living in the past. Small ball is not an effective way to win baseball games, and that's not how the game is played anymore. Still others argue that Acta does not "light a fire in his players' bellies." All I have to say to that is major league players should not need any extra motivation, and honestly I don't think this team does. Can someone name me the recent winning managers who are known for being demonstrative besides maybe Lou Piniella? Even Lou has calmed down in recent years. Is Francona a fiery manager? Or Torre? Joe Maddon? The era of Earl Weaver is over.

The only point on which I might agree with the Acta haters is on taking a hard-nosed approach to the details of the game, especially regarding defense and baserunning, but then again, the offseason mindset of the front office was to improve the offense that was the worst in the majors last season, so they went out and traded for Willingham and signed Adam Dunn, two below-average-to-terrible defensive players. You can not blame Acta for Dunn's terrible athleticism, and he has been one of the leaders in defensive lapses on the team this year. Still, it appears that Acta is improving on this hard-nosed approach, with the demotion of Milledge and Gonzalez for poor defensive play. I think Acta has now made clear to the team that failure will not be accepted, especially in regards to the bullpen.

They're on the right track, they just need some more pitching, and when this team is starting Strasburg-Zimmermann-Draft pick #10-Olsen-Lannan next year with a revamped bullpen, they'll be that middle-of-the-road team, and maybe even better. I don't see any reason why Manny Acta shouldn't be the manager of that team.

I was dubious about the Manny hiring, originally, with the proviso that he would be very good at the beginning and certainly was a very good choice to help develop the young kids (most of whom, by the way, have barely had a taste of Major League pitching / hitting) but would need to be replaced almost as soon as they became a contender. So far nothing has occurred to dissuade me from that view. Neither, frankly, have any of the arguments put forth by the Fire-Manny crowd. My real fear is that baseball might possibly go to a hockey mentality, where the managers are fired in mid-season, with no real logic (see: Mets, NY - 2008). If we get to September and it looks like we will not have any improvement on 08, then it makes sense to bring in the next manager, who might be able to see and evaluate the team for a month before heading into the off-season.

As far as Bowdin's remarks, puhleeze! If you go back to earlier posts on this blog and read some of the other writers, there might be some understanding of his lack of credibility. At this point, Hollywood is simply floundering about (correct use, indicating flopping about like a fish)looking for someone to blame for his shortcomings.

Oh, my earlier remark about firing for no reason...yes, W. Randolph needed to be fired. If that had been done when it should have been (before Spring Training), the Mets might well have won, say, two more games in April. And that would have...oh, wait, I know...put them in the playoffs.

All of the "Manny Must Go" talk is very interesting but given what he had had to work with, he's being asked to build a house out of Legos. The constant roster flux under JimBow was a farce where the team often had too much of one thing - like corner outfielders or fat middle infielders with laughable range or position players better suited to be DHs. The starting pitching ha been perennially weak and the bullpen has collapsed from overuse the past two seasons. Not to mention that JimBow always was on the make for the quick fix without regards how those moves affected the team's longterm future. Acta has been more of a babysitter and father confessor than a manager at times because of the personalties he's had to deal with - FLop, Dukes, Milledge, LoDuca, Da Meat Loaf, the Wasteland of Minimal Production to name a few. The starting rotation has had a vagabond quality and has at times included Chico, Hanrahan, Bacsik, Bowie, Hill, Patterson, Perez, Redding, Speigner, Bergmann, Simontacchi and Williams. This has been a far from stable environment and Manny at times must feel like the head counselor at Camp Runamuck. My main criticism of Acta is that he's a terrible handler of pitchers - which is at least Job No. 2 for a manager. The bullpen constantly gets overworked and overexposed because of the short leash the starters are usually on. But considering who some of those starters have been...

There is nothing wrong with Manny Acta that good players can't cure. Joe Torre, Tony Larussa, Bobby Cox, Francona, Charlie Manuel, none of the greats of the past could win with this current configuration of players. When the pitching becomes major league thru and thru, this club will perform better and win to a much higher degree than in the past.

Manny's managed his bullpen well, IMO, except any time he outs in Rivera. Based on what the FO has given him, he's managed 5 games that the team should have won. I realize "should have won" is subjective, but realistically if you hand the ball to your closer with a lead it's reasonable to expect to win. They should have SWEPT the Marlins last weekend... seriously.

If you accept my logic -- and I know some won't but go with me here -- the Nats would be 10-10 in baseball's toughest division. We'd be thrilled! Manny would be a genius.

But the FO didn't give him a lead off man, a true CF, or a bullpen. Mr. Madison rightly points out that the overall talent is better in 2009 but far too many critical pieces were left out. 6 corner OFs without a CF? Beimel was a good pickup but Saul Rivera just shouldn't be on a major league roster.

Five games Manny managed as well as anyone could, got to the end with a lead, and the 'pen failed. We'd take .500 for April and this blog would be full of Manny love!

CiL - Actually, I kind of suspected all along that they were using money from the team to pay down any cash out the door for the team. I certainly thought that was the case for the stadium add ons "they" paid for last year. Interest and taxes are money they owe others, so perhaps they are using the team to pay for that as well. A bit disingenuous, but not a shock. OTOH, I'd say DC should Marvel at their Comic point of view if also were using cash flow to cover depreciation and amortization, which are accruals and not money outlays.

i disagree with joe, wmpete, and catcher50, but i commend them for putting forth meaningful arguments rather than relying on "snark" and phil wood to mask a lack of reasonable argument. to you three, i say "agree to disagree" and...(nextpost)

I was away all day and missed the (latest) Acta discussions, but I don't really understand the point of asking the pro-Acta camp to try to convince the anti-Acta camp they are wrong or vice versa. Either would be a waste of typing time/bandwidth, IMO. If someone's mind is made up about something, it's a waste of time and effort to try to convince them otherwise. Unless one enjoys arguing for the sake of arguing. If so, argue away, dudes.

Did Boz really perpetuate the idiotic notion that Kasten and Rizzo back Manny? I know they do publicly, but they would have signed him to an extension long ago if they had any confidence in him. The lack of an extension creates a team that has no confidence in the manager, either. A la the Sopranos, management is just getting the boat revved up to take him out swimming with the fishes.